Coach AV goes or stays?

There was a comment earlier, wondering if the players have tuned him out.

I've been getting more annoyed lately with some of his questionable choices.His fave MayRay keeps getting top 6 ice time.

We had one good chance to win the cup last year. Lu craps the bed game 3 and AV leaves him in for EIGHT goals? I don't give a s**t if Lu wants to stay in, the coach needs to pull him after 4.Lu can't win on the road, so why didn't Schneids start game 4?

What's going on with the lines tonight, why is AV tinkering in an elimination game?

I thought long and hard on this, but I tihnk its time for change. Lose AV, Luongo (for his own good, our media will run him out anyways) Raymond. I hate to say it, but the NHL keeps talking about change and how things will be different in the playoffs, and that is not happening. we need a 6'4" monster for the second line... and perhaps another to play with the twins.

a stud defenceman wouldn't hurt either.

The 'Chain of Command' is the chain I am going to beat you with untill you understand I am in charge.

There was an article by Thomas Drance over at Canuck's Army on April 16th entitled, "Does AV get out coached in the post season?":http://canucksarmy.com/page/5

The article concluded that he didn't, but I am not so sure.

The "Panel" was talking about this on TSN tonight. None of them thought that AV had "lost the room" or that the team wasn't playing for him, or that the team wasn't well coached. But none of them actually gave any examples of things that he did that made the team better.

I don't know that there is any one better out there to become coach. The question is whether or not there is anyone who would be just as good, and might bring some objective assessment of the players to MG.

I voted for AV to return. He led the team to the Cup Finals last year and the team seems very comfortable with AV behind the bench. He did coach this team to two straight President trophies.

I think AV is a good coach who has proven to be a great fit here. I think he's done a great job of turning the leadership of the team over to the players and I think the group is a tight-knit group. Honestly, I don't think coaching was the problem in this series and AV and the group (with some changes) deserves another chance.

AV is responsible for the decisions of his assistant coaches. When our defence gets running around and pairings look questionable you have to wonder. When our PP dries up and not only fails to get us a goal but we give up shorties you have to wonder.

When he becomes wedded to the idea that he has to have Higgins and only Higgins on the third line when one of our most exciting lines had been AMEX and we needed offence you have to wonder.

When he doesn't have the balls to pull Raymond and put anyone else in to shake things up you have to wonder.

But as I wonder about these things I wonder where our urgency was the first two games. Where did our fore check go? I don't think I can blame these things on AV.

He has had a long run here but hell so has Trotz in Nashville.

MG had some good luck on some of his earlier moves, like Samuelsson and then last year with Higgins and Lappy. But Ballard, who I thought played well for us in the playoffs, and Booth are big ticket guys who have certainly under performed. I'm sure Cody's dad is laughing today. I defend MG because I think he has dome more good than not but I read an article recently where it was written that he has allowed himself to be talked into a few moves he was not too keen on at first. He was responding to the needs/wishes of his coach. So MG tried to give his coach the team he wanted for this year's playoff run. Now MG is fully responsible so he gets no pass.

But taking this full circle back to AV, he had the team he wanted; a decision by committee was made to make the switch to Cory; AV was given some strong suggestions on what the lines should look like. To me thats a GM seeming to give his coach the room he needs and the type of balance on the team he asked for. Just saying.

On the other side of it you wonder if AV wants to move on as well. I know he loves Vancouver and loves having this team in front of him but if an opportunity comes knocking to return to Montreal is he interested? The money could be very attractive if Montreal really does want him. He could go home.

My gut, AV will want to stay but MG will be feeling the pressure to let him go. A lot will depend upon the exit interviews and his meetings with the water boy.

It's not so much an AV thing nor a MG thing as much as it was believing that being a game 7 away from winning the Cup is going to guarantee you another safe passage back.

The team lost interest in the dirty areas of the ice near the end of the regular season and never found them again in the post season. Look back at last year's games and the forechecking, the hitting and the intensity- it just wasn't there this year.

For the Canucks they needed to get back to the finals and I think their mentality was that and that was when as a group they were going to decide 'things are different now'. The sort of forgot you have to win 3 rounds first.

If I had to look at one key area for the Canucks where it all seemed to come unglued it was the defense. It never seemd organized and cohesive and despite how good Hamhuis is and Edler at times there is not one player on the D who can carry the team and log those crazy minutes. That's where I look first.

Brick Top: Do you know what "nemesis" means? A righteous infliction of retribution manifested by an appropriate agent. Personified in this case by an 'orrible cunt... me.

Madcombinepilot wrote:I thought long and hard on this, but I tihnk its time for change. Lose AV, Luongo (for his own good, our media will run him out anyways) Raymond. I hate to say it, but the NHL keeps talking about change and how things will be different in the playoffs, and that is not happening. we need a 6'4" monster for the second line... and perhaps another to play with the twins.

a stud defenceman wouldn't hurt either.

After 6 years, I believe AV's run has ended. The team is tuning him out and his system of play is failing against the reality of the NHL, its elusive rules and reffing regime and the playoffs.

less than 24 hours after the team was eliminated...fire everybody, blow up the team, and take a wrecking ball to Rogers house.

In the end it may be that AV walks the plank but I don't see the logic at this point. Winningest coach in team history who would be employed anywhere else in the league one minute after getting his papers here? what are the odds that the next coach is gonna be a Bill Laforge clone? How about MG goes and gets some pieces to plug some glaring holes and maybe another on ice leader or two that aren't so Jekyll and Hyde like instead?

I think it's a foregone conclusion that AV will get the axe for failing to make it through the first round. I don't think he's a terrible coach. Although like many on this board I have been left scratching my head over some of his repeated decisions in the past I cannot take away from the fact that he has been arguably the most successful coach in Canucks history. Back to back Presidents Trophy speak for themselves but so does a massively disappointing first round exit (despite the obvious parity in this league and the early fall of other SC favourites)

Having said all this I really hope the team doesn't replace him with Craig Mactavish. I know that's been the rumour ever since he signed on with the Wolves but I'm just not sold on the guy. He had one miracle run with the Oilers but other than that, he's never coached a team that had a legitimate shot at winning the dance. I think Gillis will be patient with this move if Vigneault is indeed fired, as he should be.

Hate to answer a question with another question, but... If you could pick any coach (current or historical) to replace AV with, how much better would the chances be of the team achieving better results than they have shown over The AV tenure?

The comments regarding AV seem to be mostly speculation regarding AV having lost the teams ear. I'm pretty sure that there have been exactly zero Canucks quoted as even hinting at that. So, what is it exactly that AV does or does not do from a functional standpoint that could be improved on?

Is it his motivational abilities? Is it the respect level that he commands from (or has for) his players? Is it his organizational skills?... His time management? Point is, ONLY key members of the organization know the answers to those questions.

So, at the end of the day, the fans and the media can bitch and moan, and criticize the coaching, but changing it is absolutely not going to guarantee a Stanley Cup.

It ain't broke guys...

Neither Aquilini or Gillis strike me as the type to give the bloodthirsty throng a head on a stake... So I voted that he'll be back.

rockalt wrote:One thing's for sure, it's going to be a very interesting offseason.

Yeah. My guess is that the team coming back in September has a couple of major differences than the one cleaning out their lockers this week - and that AV gets one shot with the new group. I would guess that if by January the Canucks haven't become the well-oiled machine they typically run like starting in November and December that AV will be canned.

The determination will be made based on the post-season interviews with the players and personnel but if I had to put a prediction on it, it would be that AV will be gone. As the poll suggests he will be out of work for about 10 minutes when the Habs make an offer.

If he has lost the room then he's gone. If he hasn't lost the room but Gillis believes the players have nothing more to learn from him then he's gone.